Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ArmA 3 difficulty poll

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ArmA 3 difficulty poll

    for many years we have always played on the standard difficulty in ArmA - "Regular". what I'm asking here is to the community, involving what we want to change ingame

    Next update releases the last episode in the campaign and also some major updates, such as the removal of the 'magic radar' in most ground and aerial vehicles and some other gameplay updates that have no matter for this thread
    With this, the importance of knowing hostile locations, especially vehicles and other threats which can easily be found by any reconnisance-type unit will be a lot higher if we intend to do air assaults or any other type. we will no longer fly in our little bird saying that the LZ is hot because we have 3 vehicles on an invisible radar, knowing exact direction and range. One example would be the importance of having a copilot in the Hellcats using the VIS/NV/TI long-range spotting scope giving intel directly to the pilot

    this is a BIS step we can't control, and with this, I ask if TG wants to remove other aids such as the "magic map", where any team member can look at an enemy and he'll appear on the map which goes both ways, all team members will be automatically marked on the map all the time - there's really not so much usage of GPS and transmitting coordinates here
    another aid is the third-person, do we want to remove this? pilots, operators, crewmen and such would have to rely on their given HUDs instead of having a 360 view knowing where all threats come from, creating more focus on proper convoy procedures as we are used to - such as vehicle commanders directing all and any movement, and driver looking for mines


    TLDR; remove third-person and/or other aids like magic-map

    debate on this TG; it's a big step for all of us
    56
    Keep 3rd Person View
    17.86%
    10
    Remove 3rd Person View
    32.14%
    18
    Use "Auto Spot"
    3.57%
    2
    Remove "Auto Spot"
    46.43%
    26
    - Current ArmA Pathfinder

    sigpic

  • #2
    Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

    Xorilliz has brought up some interesting points for people to discuss. Simply voting on a poll won't be useful for the debate, I encourage everyone to also discuss the pros/cons of each aspect. The bigger question in all of this is a migration from "Regular Mode" to "Veteran/Hardcore Mode", or some hybrid.

    Please avoid being sidetracked beyond the initial questions he asked.....
    Last edited by TheBigC; 03-13-2014, 12:24 PM.
    "The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws." -Machiavelli

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

      I voted to keep Third person for two specific reasons - First, it helps with positional awareness when driving a ground vehicle (for some reason I can always see the front bumper but not often even the horizon in ground vehicles), and Second, for video shots. I never use it in the game on the ground; not my cup of tea and it doesn't help me much (again MHO), but I film a lot and getting a good squad shot from 3P looks awesome in a video, but those are the only two reasons I'd keep it.

      I voted to eliminate auto spot - only as good as the last time the individual saw the EI or otherwise, if that vehicle is moving (and they are not actively looking at it) then the position is "point in time" at best. To Xor's point on the use of good spotting and marking we also need to "up our game" (pun intended) on marking and using proper (or at least close) marks when marking the various types of enemy when we DO mark the map, also the removal of those marks when the threat is gone (eliminated) or further unknown would be a key step (this speaks to another conversation on overall "logistics" and our need to manage that if we DO eliminate the auto spot).

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

        I will throw a wrench in all of this and ask every one of you if this applies to the server 1 as well as events?
        "The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws." -Machiavelli

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

          good point there Solo on video shots and also the vehicle driving even though I'd debate it otherwise, MRAPs are very limited on view and driving them should be and is tough

          as for auto spot I do also want to add that whenever we use UAV's, it spots every single enemy unit or group for the whole team and is in a constant updating feed, we would know where they all are... this is the same if we spot them from the ground. if this gets disabled, we would have to rely on constant spotting from all friendly units and marking them in as a best way possible, the unit spotted would never be on the mark exactly unless given a lot of time
          pros would be its a lot more newbie-friendly in some way, but in a none-realistic way

          edit: I'd say this is for server 1, as for events it'd be up to the mission maker or something. debatable.
          - Current ArmA Pathfinder

          sigpic

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

            I like removing third person view while on foot, but I do see a point in keeping them. Sometimes, it gets difficult on certain vehicles without them, such as the Hunters.


            |TG-Irr| Lonewolf80

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

              Good questions Xor. Personally I don't have a huge issue with third person in PvE if players use it appropriately, i.e not for looking around corners without sticking their head out. (I'd prefer it switched off for TvT missions)

              I normally stick to first person when on foot, but sometimes I'll switch to third to get "peripheral vision" of where my team mates are. I've had to do this a few time whilst learning to FTL because I was feeling a bit mentally overloaded. Some people dislike 3rd / 1st due to "realism", I think each of first and third has some unrealistic aspects so I don't buy into either of them being "more realistic" than any other.

              As for vehicles the ArmA view point is in my opinion terrible as I can't move my head up/down or side to side easily. In real life I do this to see the nose of the vehicle or position something better in the mirrors. Possibly its would be easier with a TrackIR, but without I think third person is almost compulsory in a lot of vehicles.

              To support Solo's comments re videos, for B's last Diary mission I was in the back of a Hunter with no optics. Without third person the whole mission would have been looking at a small patch of tarmac for an hour. With 3rd person I could look around and take some video and watch the action.I made sure I didn't call out any contacts that I couldn't have seen from my position in the vehicle.

              Basically - I say keep third person as long as we continue to act like mature TGers and don't abuse it.

              As for the map helpers, I say switch them off. I'd prefer to use markers / comms / etc to spot enemies and to coordinate friendlies. I know its the future but sometimes seeing the real time updates of enemies on the map makes me remember I'm playing a game.
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                Originally posted by mecharius View Post
                As for vehicles the ArmA view point is in my opinion terrible as I can't move my head up/down or side to side easily. In real life I do this to see the nose of the vehicle or position something better in the mirrors. Possibly its would be easier with a TrackIR, but without I think third person is almost compulsory in a lot of vehicles.
                double click alt and you can use your mouse to look around while driving with W,A,S,D - alternatively use numpad 2,4,6,8 to set your default direction to look at or hold alt and move mouse to look around... some options there.

                I see the advantages in keeping third-person to an extent for videos and such even though it'd bring a different gamestyle combat-wise. I am completely neutral on this as opposed to the auto spot... I don't like this :)
                - Current ArmA Pathfinder

                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                  I am easy, I will play what ever you put up there as long as I can find my squad mates. I am happiest when these old eyes have a scoped rifle, all the rest is gravy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                    Since we are all throwing stuff out, here is my rational.

                    First off, I think that events should be geared towards a more difficult mode.

                    First person view. I understand both sides with 3rd person view. When I play it normally does not affect me too much. However, when look at it from a gameplay flaw the ArmA engine is not perfect. For example, if you are driving a vehicle, your vehicle gets damaged and becomes not mobile by the smallest of rocks. Using 1st person view is not acceptable for avoiding that. There is nothing more frustrating than driving for 20 minutes to a mission and have a vehicle break down because of a hidden rock and you wasted your time.

                    AutoSpot. There is an overall lack of intelligence in the game. When you look at something like Alive, there is an intelligence module that comes close to replicating real life, i.e. the enemy situation on a Blueforce Tracker. Currently the map becomes a hybrid of intelligence and navigation tool, something it should not be. We are getting better at marking maps, but with things like air assets, UAVs, UGVs, etc there is information coming back as it would in real life. Again, due to technical limitations in the game the map is the only way to display because of the way spotting handles it.

                    There is a happy medium with all of this as well as a couple technical solutions that may come into play. By all means post up your thoughts..
                    "The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and as there cannot be good laws where the state is not well armed, it follows that where they are well armed they have good laws." -Machiavelli

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                      I voted to remove the third person view. I have read most of the concerns and they are valid. But in my opinion it adds to realism and immersion of the gameplay. It also forces players to be careful, pay attention to instrument readings, clear corners, and face some challenges. I use third person all the time. It helps me keep situational awareness if I play as a leader. I catch myself peeking over fences as it allows it. I also catch players hiding behind cover while spotting targets, in which I lose all immersion. Feels like we are cheating against the AI. Another thing would be that we attract a different type of gamers and game-play with 3rd person view turned off.

                      I voted to remove the auto-spotting. I raised it also in project development team forum. I think it is unrealistic for the whole team to know enemy position because one of their field of view happened look that way. Human player might not have actually seen it but it is lit up on the map. As a result unintentionally leaders are able to direct members based on reading the map. This also allows us human players to cheat against AI. This feature turned off would force more proper contact reporting as well as force better 360 defense as player move or hold a position.

                      I also vote to remove the squad members' location always being marked on map. With our name-tag script we are able to know who is who and where in close proximity. Although I can see if a public player starts to do his own thing we really cannot track him down.

                      This is not just matter of switching to veteran because as a teamwork oriented community we must keep VON ID on even if we get everything else to turn off. Even with proper radio procedures, having Von ID off as a result of playing on veteran will seriously hamper the coordination effort. But we can freely configure server settings to have certain features on while some features off in any difficulty.

                      Finally we could allow all these things in Recruit difficulty setting which is not selected by default.

                      As for events being set up to be more challenging, I am against it. We as a community we need standardize a lot of things. This include team management script we use, name tag script etc... If regulars who are used to an easier setting is thrown into a more difficult setting in an event, they will not be prepared to deal with sudden and rare changes. Consequently, gameplay and fun suffers because resulting failures.

                      If we move to a certain standard we move together and keep it consistent. Now I believe as a community we have evolved our tactics, habits enough such that we are ready to move together to a more difficult setting.
                      Last edited by hedgehog; 03-13-2014, 04:44 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                        Originally posted by Xorilliz View Post
                        double click alt and you can use your mouse to look around while driving with W,A,S,D - alternatively use numpad 2,4,6,8 to set your default direction to look at or hold alt and move mouse to look around... some options there.

                        I see the advantages in keeping third-person to an extent for videos and such even though it'd bring a different gamestyle combat-wise. I am completely neutral on this as opposed to the auto spot... I don't like this :)
                        Yeah that helps but keyboard steering is not great, so its a trade off :) Its still not very natural and you can't move your head "up" to look further over the nose (EDIT: or down to look out the side windows). I'm building myself a track IR (with a $10 budget), if I can get that going it may make make life better!

                        Anyways having had my say, like Chief I'll be happy either way as long as we can keep the U key!
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                          <-- has track IR . . . doesn't help . . . much . . . .still seems like I'm in the headliner of most vehicles (OK I'm tall, but not THAT tall). If there was a way to adjust the seat DOWN so I could see the horizon a little more I'd be inclined to stay first person in ground vehicles all the time (easier for me to drive).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                            Originally posted by |TG| B View Post
                            If we move to a certain standard we move together and keep it consistent. Now I believe as a community we have evolved our tactics, habits enough such that we are ready to move together to a more difficult setting.
                            I feel like we've reached a milestone where there's obstacles, if we stop at these we'd choose simplicity where people can film and drive in 3P whenever they like, if we choose to change, all our gameplay will depend on that people see what others sees - you would not look over a wall, you'd look towards the side that you are supposed to cover - sometimes it feels like our squad does not cover all their corners because they're focused on doing something in 3P, whether it be looking and making sure everyone does their job or if they spot a place they can normally not see - a place that is not important to have a look at

                            if we decide to turn it off we'd also as B said recieve new people to TG ingame that plays after how the people in the server are, not from how much efficient he is by using 3P, I would not mind overlooking any photography options if it is to see the server grow in a better way... perhaps we can look at other options such as video spectators by slot, and if not so, I'd rather look inside a car for one hour if all the hours in TG would become better

                            we are all different on this aspect, this is what I feel personally
                            - Current ArmA Pathfinder

                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: ArmA 3 difficulty poll

                              For the sake of being clear - AutoSpot = 0 and Map = 1. So it's the known to friendly units that get marked on the map due to the Map variable. I've been keen on setting this to 0 for a long time. You may have noticed me ignore a contact report when I hear "We have enemies on the map"....all I heard was "LA LA LA LA". I don't mind some of the bookkeeping being done by the engine though. My problem with it is the real time intel that we know that they went over the hill and flanked left because of a magic map. So, I'm ok without this. If we want to simulate a Blufor Tracker system then I think there is a snazzier solution that we can script for inclusion in missions. I also did a marker script for a mission that only updated every 60 seconds and was 15 seconds behind real time for a spec ops mission once. That didn't do a bad simulation of sat tracking of enemies.

                              I'm also ok with no 3rd person. I do think some of the vehicles reach the level of sillyness when they are taken out by a small stone but can drive over the brick half wall. When we get a convoy going it is a massive help to the convoy commander to actually know that everyone is mounted up for sure. It is worse for the server to get a click down the road and we've left our new guest sitting at the starting gate thinking we abandoned them. But, infantry 3rd person all the time. Helo pilots who use 3rd person to land.....not cool with me. So as you can see, I'm conflicted on this one. I can do with it because I simply choose not to use it unless I'm leading and want to make sure everyone is included. I can do without it because there are other admin tools we can put in place that tell us that same data in a more usable form.
                              |TG-189th| Unkl
                              ArmA 3 Game Officer
                              Dean of Tactical Gamer University
                              189th Infantry Brigade Member
                              SUBMIT A RIBBON NOMINATION OR CONTACT AN ARMA ADMIN
                              "We quickly advance in the opposite direction and take cover in a house on the SW side of town." - BadStache

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X